Tim,I read your earlier reply to the article regarding repainting non skid.
I intend to repaint mine this winter, the only difference to mine than to the earlier reference is that the paint on mine is peeling. Are there any special steps needed to do before repainting?
Painting nonskid
-
Tim
- Shipwright Extraordinaire
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 6:39 pm
- Boat Name: Glissando
- Boat Type: Pearson Triton
- Location: Whitefield, ME
- Contact:
Peeling paint is usually a sign that the substrate preparation might have been less than perfect, resulting in the paint losing its tenous adhesion.
Before repainting, you'll need to thoroughly sand the nonskid areas to remove all traces of loose and peeling paint. Don't skimp on this step, or you run the risk that your new paint will shortly begin flaking away too. It's probably better to sand too much rather than too little--and pay close attention to the other areas to, as what appears to be sound paint now may only be a year or so away from flaking off like the surrounding areas. Once it's thoroughly sanded, sand it as smooth as you like and apply the proper primer before redoing the nonskid.
My deck is still in good condition and well adhered, so I'll just be doing an allover sanding with 80 and 120 grit before applying 2 coats of the nonskid paint.
Before repainting, you'll need to thoroughly sand the nonskid areas to remove all traces of loose and peeling paint. Don't skimp on this step, or you run the risk that your new paint will shortly begin flaking away too. It's probably better to sand too much rather than too little--and pay close attention to the other areas to, as what appears to be sound paint now may only be a year or so away from flaking off like the surrounding areas. Once it's thoroughly sanded, sand it as smooth as you like and apply the proper primer before redoing the nonskid.
My deck is still in good condition and well adhered, so I'll just be doing an allover sanding with 80 and 120 grit before applying 2 coats of the nonskid paint.
---------------------------------------------------
Forum Founder--No Longer Participating
Forum Founder--No Longer Participating
-
Dave, 397
This brings up a question for me...
The first foray I had into doing a whole new nonskid surface, I used (at great cost) these little clear chunks that System Three sold in a quart can. I'd roll on a thinnish coat of resin and then make it a beach with the stuff, poking holes in the can lid like a salt shaker to do so. Next day, I'd vacuum off the excess, sift the vacuumed material for re-use and go on to the next section. It made a very good nonskid surface and looked molded!
On the Triton, I was planning to go with a simpler nonskid effect achieved by mixing up a bunch of short mill fiber and balloons into the resin, spreading it around and hitting it with a texture roller as it started to kick off and stiffen. Makes a very tenacious nonskid that looks pretty good, and it is fast and cheap. I still may do so on the cockpit sole and in a couple of other high-wear areas, but it looks and feels a bit rough to have the entire boat done in it, especially since the previously dealdly slick Triton coachroof is getting the treatment, too. While my boat is probably closer in spirit to a fishboat than a yacht, I still care about the looks somewhat!<G>
The question here, is if anyone knows exactly what that system three stuff was and if it is available bulk and generically. It was pretty spendy back when I did my little old Ranger 23, and I only used 4 quarts! To be practical, I need more like 4 gallons on a Triton, I fear!
It was nicer, I thought, than walnut shell (which is a lot cheaoper if you buy it as blasting media than as a paint additive, BTW!) as when/if the paint wears and/or is abraded the clear granules did not look "dirty" like exposed shell or sand. The only concern I have is that it renders a bit finer pattern than the rolled-up method, and the boat may have to stand periodic re-paintings without benefit of re-doing the nonskid. I do not want to have my pattern start filling in! If it is a generic sort of product, I would imagine it could be had in various size particles...you see my interest here?
Using the 2-part will help of course. Until we got the building that the boat is in, I was faced with rolling, so I was going to go with one-part paint. Now that I have a heatable building and put in a bunch of good lighting, spraying seems like tha best and easiest way of dealing with it all...which puts it at two-part.
On that topic, perhaps someone with more of a timeline in boat re-painting than I have could explain to me a mystery I have going in terms of paint products, as well.
The one-part paints we see now do not seem to hold up well on decks for more than a few years.
My old Commander, DECISION, had been painted over on the nonskid apparently at the factory (!) as it was under all the fittings...over that horrid "buff" color. When I first met Dee in '92 or so, the light bluse was starting to give way in a few spots but held well. By the time I bought her almost 10 years later, it was going away pretty good, and within a year it was mainly gone and I had buff deck with blue speckles. I did always like the fact that the paint went away first in telling places, like the nonskid just inboard the toerail!
Anyway, it seems to me that whatever sort of enamel they used back in '66 had a whole lot more stiction and durability than modern one-parts that I have seen. Could be subjective, but I wonder if anyone has a view or ideas on this to share. If I could get that same paint now, I'd not waste my efforts on 2-part LPU!
While I'm on the paint rant...
On my R23 I used this paint that S3 had just started selling which seemed pretty wild 10 years ago. Later on I recognized the type of product when they (this being a generic sort of "they" as in many sources) started foisting off "waterborne lacquers" "waterbornre urethanes" or what I generically think of as 'WaterPoly' in the woodworking trades. We tried to use it in place of Nitro in the guitar shop but gave up fast. Yikky stuff in a lot of ways. Safer for the environment, perhaps, but just as ugly for the painter if you read the MSDS...and a pain to work with. Sorry to digress.
The S3 stuff I bought was sold as a "water-reduced urethane", and you did indeed mix it down with water as a reducer before mixing in a given number drops of the "crosslinker" for a given amount, waiting exactly so many minutes before applying, watching exactly so many minutes potlife and exactly so many minutes recoat compatibility...it was sort of a pain to deal with. Had a friend who was a chemistry major end up helping as the designated mixer, and he had two minute-minders, a clock and two wristwatches to keep right on top of it all, including adjusting his mixes to my average speed of application, etc!
The one big advantage of the stuff was that you did not have to 'roll and tip'...just brushed or rolled. When it went off, the slight marks you had pretty much flashed out flat! Didn't look quite like you sprayed it (what does?) but it was the closest thing I ever saw.
Anybody else use this stuff ever?
I'd be curious if there was an industrial coating of this type still to be had...only perhaps more refined.
Another thought I've had for topsides paint is something like Ditzler Fleetstar or a similar Urethane product. This is stuff that makes old-time Imron look wimpy, they paint firetrucks and semis with it...you paint it and then you better buff it out within the prescribed number of days if you're ever going to...but it stays shiny for years and years on that fire truck or whatever without ever being buffed or waxed. Might be a good thing on a boat! Spendy though, and chemically hostile to the painter in a way that makes you wanna go bathe in some acrylic enamel and then chug down a quart of Nitrocellulose before doing your toenails in Red Lead. Still, we only live once, and I only would be dealing with it for one boat. It is also on the gloppy side consistency wise in a way that is very compatible with HVLP guns...thinner typle materials sure aren't, at least not for me.
OK, enough ramble and enough dumb questions, I guess. If anyone can answer at least some of them, I'd truly appreciate it!
Best,
Dave
The first foray I had into doing a whole new nonskid surface, I used (at great cost) these little clear chunks that System Three sold in a quart can. I'd roll on a thinnish coat of resin and then make it a beach with the stuff, poking holes in the can lid like a salt shaker to do so. Next day, I'd vacuum off the excess, sift the vacuumed material for re-use and go on to the next section. It made a very good nonskid surface and looked molded!
On the Triton, I was planning to go with a simpler nonskid effect achieved by mixing up a bunch of short mill fiber and balloons into the resin, spreading it around and hitting it with a texture roller as it started to kick off and stiffen. Makes a very tenacious nonskid that looks pretty good, and it is fast and cheap. I still may do so on the cockpit sole and in a couple of other high-wear areas, but it looks and feels a bit rough to have the entire boat done in it, especially since the previously dealdly slick Triton coachroof is getting the treatment, too. While my boat is probably closer in spirit to a fishboat than a yacht, I still care about the looks somewhat!<G>
The question here, is if anyone knows exactly what that system three stuff was and if it is available bulk and generically. It was pretty spendy back when I did my little old Ranger 23, and I only used 4 quarts! To be practical, I need more like 4 gallons on a Triton, I fear!
It was nicer, I thought, than walnut shell (which is a lot cheaoper if you buy it as blasting media than as a paint additive, BTW!) as when/if the paint wears and/or is abraded the clear granules did not look "dirty" like exposed shell or sand. The only concern I have is that it renders a bit finer pattern than the rolled-up method, and the boat may have to stand periodic re-paintings without benefit of re-doing the nonskid. I do not want to have my pattern start filling in! If it is a generic sort of product, I would imagine it could be had in various size particles...you see my interest here?
Using the 2-part will help of course. Until we got the building that the boat is in, I was faced with rolling, so I was going to go with one-part paint. Now that I have a heatable building and put in a bunch of good lighting, spraying seems like tha best and easiest way of dealing with it all...which puts it at two-part.
On that topic, perhaps someone with more of a timeline in boat re-painting than I have could explain to me a mystery I have going in terms of paint products, as well.
The one-part paints we see now do not seem to hold up well on decks for more than a few years.
My old Commander, DECISION, had been painted over on the nonskid apparently at the factory (!) as it was under all the fittings...over that horrid "buff" color. When I first met Dee in '92 or so, the light bluse was starting to give way in a few spots but held well. By the time I bought her almost 10 years later, it was going away pretty good, and within a year it was mainly gone and I had buff deck with blue speckles. I did always like the fact that the paint went away first in telling places, like the nonskid just inboard the toerail!
Anyway, it seems to me that whatever sort of enamel they used back in '66 had a whole lot more stiction and durability than modern one-parts that I have seen. Could be subjective, but I wonder if anyone has a view or ideas on this to share. If I could get that same paint now, I'd not waste my efforts on 2-part LPU!
While I'm on the paint rant...
On my R23 I used this paint that S3 had just started selling which seemed pretty wild 10 years ago. Later on I recognized the type of product when they (this being a generic sort of "they" as in many sources) started foisting off "waterborne lacquers" "waterbornre urethanes" or what I generically think of as 'WaterPoly' in the woodworking trades. We tried to use it in place of Nitro in the guitar shop but gave up fast. Yikky stuff in a lot of ways. Safer for the environment, perhaps, but just as ugly for the painter if you read the MSDS...and a pain to work with. Sorry to digress.
The S3 stuff I bought was sold as a "water-reduced urethane", and you did indeed mix it down with water as a reducer before mixing in a given number drops of the "crosslinker" for a given amount, waiting exactly so many minutes before applying, watching exactly so many minutes potlife and exactly so many minutes recoat compatibility...it was sort of a pain to deal with. Had a friend who was a chemistry major end up helping as the designated mixer, and he had two minute-minders, a clock and two wristwatches to keep right on top of it all, including adjusting his mixes to my average speed of application, etc!
The one big advantage of the stuff was that you did not have to 'roll and tip'...just brushed or rolled. When it went off, the slight marks you had pretty much flashed out flat! Didn't look quite like you sprayed it (what does?) but it was the closest thing I ever saw.
Anybody else use this stuff ever?
I'd be curious if there was an industrial coating of this type still to be had...only perhaps more refined.
Another thought I've had for topsides paint is something like Ditzler Fleetstar or a similar Urethane product. This is stuff that makes old-time Imron look wimpy, they paint firetrucks and semis with it...you paint it and then you better buff it out within the prescribed number of days if you're ever going to...but it stays shiny for years and years on that fire truck or whatever without ever being buffed or waxed. Might be a good thing on a boat! Spendy though, and chemically hostile to the painter in a way that makes you wanna go bathe in some acrylic enamel and then chug down a quart of Nitrocellulose before doing your toenails in Red Lead. Still, we only live once, and I only would be dealing with it for one boat. It is also on the gloppy side consistency wise in a way that is very compatible with HVLP guns...thinner typle materials sure aren't, at least not for me.
OK, enough ramble and enough dumb questions, I guess. If anyone can answer at least some of them, I'd truly appreciate it!
Best,
Dave